Sections in This Issue:

Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.

[Pages S3633-S3639]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
S. 3239. A bill to provide for a uniform national standard for the
housing and treatment of egg-laying hens, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation,
with Senators Blumenthal, Brown, Cantwell, Merkley, Vitter, and Wyden,
that will codify an agreement reached by the nation's largest egg
producer organization, the United Egg Producers, and the largest animal
welfare organization, the Humane Society of the United States.
In its most simple terms, the legislation sets a national standard
for the treatment of egg-laying hens and the labeling of eggs.
As of today, 6 States, including California, have set their own
standards about how egg-laying hens should be raised, and 18 other
States allow citizen ballot initiatives could initiate similar laws in
the future.
These State standards will make it difficult for egg producers to
freely ship across State lines.
Starting in 2015, eggs produced in Iowa, Indiana and other egg-
exporting states can no longer be shipped to California because the
hens will have been raised in cages that do not meet California's
standards.
Different standards in Michigan and Ohio will take effect later,
further adding to the patchwork of regulations.
As States with disparate standards continue to protect their own egg
producers by banning the sale of eggs from States with lower or no
standards, a complicated web of State laws will impair interstate
commerce.
I have met with a number of egg producers and their concerns vary.
For some producers, different regulations increase costs because new
cages must be designed for each State in which they operate.
Other producers fear that egg prices in states without regulations
will plummet as imports flood their market.
Some egg producers selling to national grocery stores will have to
produce eggs that meet different standards in different States.
Concerns don't end with producers.
Consumers can expect to see higher prices at grocery stores and
restaurants will have to pay more for every egg they prepare.
Millions of individuals, including myself, are concerned about the
living conditions of these animals.
That is why I am pleased to introduce this legislation today. The
United Egg Producers and the Humane Society of the United States worked
for over a year to reach this compromise, and I believe it is one that
strikes a very fair balance.
Producers must enlarge cages for egg-laying hens and allow space for
the birds to engage in natural behaviors such as nesting and perching.
Producers will have up to 18 years to meet this standard and make the
required investments.
The legislation will officially outlaw the practice of starving
chickens to increase egg-production, a cruel practice that is rarely
used today, and one with consensus to end.
The bill will also lead to improved air quality in hen-houses by
prohibiting excessive ammonia levels and it requires humane euthanasia
of spent hens. This is also already common practice in the industry.
At its heart, this legislation is about protecting the future of the
egg industry.
The egg industry brought this legislation to Congress and has asked
us to help them implement the uniform regulations needed to survive and
grow.
With this legislation, egg producers will have the market certainty
they need and a reasonable timetables to make the required changes.
Producers need these uniform national standards so they can invest in
new cages without facing the risk of more stringent state laws
rendering their investments moot.
The egg industry is prepared to make these investments, many of which
can be accomplished during the normal course of replacing aged
equipment.
In addition to promoting industry stability, this bill will save jobs
and strengthen the economy.
Furthermore, consumers are already embracing these reforms. Polls
indicate broad support for the provisions in this bill and for humane
treatment of egg-laying hens in general.
A recent survey found that 64 percent of Americans say that these
newer facilities should be required through Federal legislation.
A majority, 58 percent, of American consumers also support a national
standard.
The survey found 92 percent of consumers support the industry
transitioning to these new enriched cages.
Candidly, it is not often that we see this sort of compromise in
Washington.
Two groups that have been in fundamental conflict for years sat down
and reached a deal.
The egg industry and the Humane Society are lock-step in their
support for this bill. They are joined in endorsing the bill by the
American Veterinary Medical Association and the Consumer Federation of
America.
Even though the egg industry supports this bill, some still target
this legislation as anti-agriculture they suggest the legislation will
somehow be applied to, or set a precedent for Federal regulation of
other industries.
That is simply not the case.
[[Page S3634]]
I want to be clear: requirements in the Egg Products Inspection Act
Amendments of 2012 only apply to the production of eggs. The bill will
not affect any other agricultural product including beef, pork, poultry
and milk.
This legislation is a responsible compromise between those who
advocate for more humane treatment for egg-laying hens and those who
put breakfast on our tables.
I hope that even in this partisan climate we can enact this
commonsense and widely endorsed legislation.
This legislation protects restaurants, bakers, food processors and
American consumers from unnecessarily high egg prices. It protects egg
producers from having eggs they can't sell.
This legislation is a reasonable, widely-supported solution to a
real, costly and growing problem. The bill has the support of the
United Egg Producers, which represents nearly 90 percent of the
Nation's egg industry, as well as nine state and regional egg producer
groups, more than 100 individual egg farms and more than 880 other
family farms.
I urge you to join me in supporting this important legislation.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 3239
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Egg Products Inspection Act
Amendments of 2012''.
SEC. 2. HEN HOUSING AND TREATMENT STANDARDS.
(a) Definitions.--Section 4 of the Egg Products Inspection
Act (21 U.S.C. 1033) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (a) as subsection (c);
(2) by redesignating subsections (b), (c), (d), (e), (f),
and (g) as subsections (f), (g), (h), (i), (j), and (k),
respectively;
(3) by redesignating subsections (h) and (i) as subsections
(n) and (o), respectively;
(4) by redesignating subsections (j), (k), and (l) as
subsections (r), (s), and (t), respectively;
(5) by redesignating subsections (m), (n), (o), (p), (q),
(r), (s), (t), (u), (v), (w), (x), (y), and (z) as
subsections (v), (w), (x), (y), (z), (aa), (bb), (cc), (dd),
(ee), (ff), (gg), (hh), and (ii), respectively;
(6) by inserting before subsection (c), as redesignated by
paragraph (1), the following new subsections:
``(a) The term `adequate environmental enrichments' means
adequate perch space, dust bathing or scratching areas, and
nest space, as defined by the Secretary of Agriculture, based
on the best available science, including the most recent
studies available at the time that the Secretary defines the
term. The Secretary shall issue regulations defining this
term not later than January 1, 2017, and the final
regulations shall go into effect on December 31, 2018.
``(b) The term `adequate housing-related labeling' means a
conspicuous, legible marking on the front or top of a package
of eggs accurately indicating the type of housing that the
egg-laying hens were provided during egg production, in one
of the following formats:
``(1) `Eggs from free-range hens' to indicate that the egg-
laying hens from which the eggs or egg products were derived
were, during egg production--
``(A) not housed in caging devices; and
``(B) provided with outdoor access.
``(2) `Eggs from cage-free hens' to indicate that the egg-
laying hens from which the eggs or egg products were derived
were, during egg production, not housed in caging devices.
``(3) `Eggs from enriched cages' to indicate that the egg-
laying hens from which the eggs or egg products were derived
were, during egg production, housed in caging devices that--
``(A) contain adequate environmental enrichments; and
``(B) provide the hens a minimum of 116 square inches of
individual floor space per brown hen and 101 square inches of
individual floor space per white hen.
``(4) `Eggs from caged hens' to indicate that the egg-
laying hens from which the eggs or egg products were derived
were, during egg production, housed in caging devices that
either--
``(A) do not contain adequate environmental enrichments; or
``(B) do not provide the hens a minimum of 116 square
inches of individual floor space per brown hen and 101 square
inches of individual floor space per white hen.'';
(7) by inserting after subsection (c), as redesignated by
paragraph (1), the following new subsections:
``(d) The term `brown hen' means a brown egg-laying hen
used for commercial egg production.
``(e) The term `caging device' means any cage, enclosure,
or other device used for the housing of egg-laying hens for
the production of eggs in commerce, but does not include an
open barn or other fixed structure without internal caging
devices.'';
(8) by inserting after subsection (k), as redesignated by
paragraph (2), the following new subsections:
``(l) The term `egg-laying hen' means any female
domesticated chicken, including white hens and brown hens,
used for the commercial production of eggs for human
consumption.
``(m) The term `existing caging device' means any caging
device that was continuously in use for the production of
eggs in commerce up through and including December 31,
2011.'';
(9) by inserting after subsection (o), as redesignated by
paragraph (3), the following new subsections:
``(p) The term `feed-withdrawal molting' means the practice
of preventing food intake for the purpose of inducing egg-
laying hens to molt.
``(q) The term `individual floor space' means the amount of
total floor space in a caging device available to each egg-
laying hen in the device, which is calculated by measuring
the total floor space of the caging device and dividing by
the total number of egg-laying hens in the device.'';
(10) by inserting after subsection (t), as redesignated by
paragraph (4), the following new subsection:
``(u) The term `new caging device' means any caging device
that was not continuously in use for the production of eggs
in commerce on or before December 31, 2011.''; and
(11) by inserting at the end the following new subsections:
``(jj) The term `water-withdrawal molting' means the
practice of preventing water intake for the purpose of
inducing egg-laying hens to molt.
``(kk) The term `white hen' means a white egg-laying hen
used for commercial egg production.''.
(b) Housing and Treatment of Egg-Laying Hens.--The Egg
Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 1031 et seq.) is amended
by inserting after section 7 the following new sections:
``Sec. 7A. Housing and treatment of egg-laying hens
``(a) Environmental Enrichments.--
``(1) Existing caging devices.--All existing caging devices
must provide egg-laying hens housed therein, beginning 15
years after the date of enactment of the Egg Products
Inspection Act Amendments of 2012, adequate environmental
enrichments.
``(2) New caging devices.--All new caging devices must
provide egg-laying hens housed therein, beginning nine years
after the date of enactment of the Egg Products Inspection
Act Amendments of 2012, adequate environmental enrichments.
``(3) Caging devices in california.--All caging devices in
California must provide egg-laying hens housed therein,
beginning December 31, 2018, adequate environmental
enrichments.
``(b) Floor Space.--
``(1) Existing caging devices.--All existing cages devices
must provide egg-laying hens housed therein--
``(A) beginning four years after the date of enactment of
the Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012 and until
the date that is 15 years after the date of enactment of the
Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012, a minimum of
76 square inches of individual floor space per brown hen and
67 square inches of individual floor space per white hen; and
``(B) beginning 15 years after the date of enactment of the
Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012, a minimum of
144 square inches of individual floor space per brown hen and
124 square inches of individual floor space per white hen.
``(2) New caging devices.--Except as provided in paragraph
(3), all new caging devices must provide egg-laying hens
housed therein--
``(A) beginning three years after the date of enactment of
the Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012 and until
the date that is six years after the date of enactment of the
Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012, a minimum of
90 square inches of individual floor space per brown hen and
78 square inches of individual floor space per white hen;
``(B) beginning six years after the date of enactment of
the Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012 and until
the date that is nine years after the date of enactment of
the Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012, a minimum
of 102 square inches of individual floor space per brown hen
and 90 square inches of individual floor space per white hen;
``(C) beginning nine years after the date of enactment of
the Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012 and until
the date that is 12 years after the date of enactment of the
Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012, a minimum of
116 square inches of individual floor space per brown hen and
101 square inches of individual floor space per white hen;
``(D) beginning 12 years after the date of enactment of the
Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012 and until the
date that is 15 years after the date of enactment of the Egg
Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012, a minimum of 130
square inches of individual floor space per brown hen and 113
square inches of individual floor space per white hen; and
[[Page S3635]]
``(E) beginning 15 years after the date of enactment of the
Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012, a minimum of
144 square inches of individual floor space per brown hen and
124 square inches of individual floor space per white hen.
``(3) California caging devices.--All caging devices in
California must provide egg-laying hens housed therein--
``(A) beginning January 1, 2015, and through December 31,
2020, a minimum of 134 square inches of individual floor
space per brown hen and 116 square inches of individual floor
space per white hen; and
``(B) beginning January 1, 2021, a minimum of 144 square
inches of individual floor space per brown hen and 124 square
inches of individual floor space per white hen.
``(c) Air Quality.--Beginning two years after the date of
enactment of the Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of
2012, an egg handler shall provide all egg-laying hens under
his ownership or control with acceptable air quality, which
does not exceed more than 25 parts per million of ammonia
during normal operations.
``(d) Forced Molting.--Beginning two years after the date
of enactment of the Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of
2012, no egg handler may subject any egg-laying hen under his
ownership or control to feed-withdrawal or water-withdrawal
molting.
``(e) Euthanasia.--Beginning two years after the date of
enactment of the Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of
2012, an egg handler shall provide, when necessary, all egg-
laying hens under his ownership or control with euthanasia
that is humane and uses a method deemed `Acceptable' by the
American Veterinary Medical Association.
``(f) Prohibition on New Unenrichable Cages.--No person
shall build, construct, implement, or place into operation
any new caging device for the production of eggs to be sold
in commerce unless the device--
``(1) provides the egg-laying hens to be contained therein
a minimum of 76 square inches of individual floor space per
brown hen or 67 square inches of individual floor space per
white hen; and
``(2) is capable of being adapted to accommodate adequate
environmental enrichments.
``(g) Exemptions.--
``(1) Recently-installed existing caging devices.--The
requirements contained in subsections (a)(1) and (b)(1)(B)
shall not apply to any existing caging device that was first
placed into operation between January 1, 2008, and December
31, 2011. This exemption shall expire 18 years after the date
of enactment of the Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of
2012, at which time the requirements contained in subsections
(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B) shall apply to all existing caging
devices.
``(2) Hens already in production.--The requirements
contained in subsections (a)(1), (a)(2), (b)(1)(B), and
(b)(2) shall not apply to any caging device containing egg-
laying hens who are already in egg production on the date
that such requirement takes effect. This exemption shall
expire on the date that such egg-laying hens are removed from
egg production.
``(3) Small producers.--Nothing contained in this section
shall apply to an egg handler who buys, sells, handles, or
processes eggs or egg products solely from one flock of not
more than 3,000 egg-laying hens.
``Sec. 7B. Phase-in conversion requirements
``(a) First Conversion Phase.--As of six years after the
date of enactment of the Egg Products Inspection Act
Amendments of 2012, at least 25 percent of the egg-laying
hens in commercial egg production shall be housed either in
new caging devices or in existing caging devices that provide
the hens contained therein with a minimum of 102 square
inches of individual floor space per brown hen and 90 square
inches of individual floor space per white hen.
``(b) Second Conversion Phase.--As of 12 years after the
date of enactment of the Egg Products Inspection Act
Amendments of 2012, at least 55 percent of the egg-laying
hens in commercial egg production shall be housed either in
new caging devices or in existing caging devices that provide
the hens contained therein with a minimum of 130 square
inches of individual floor space per brown hen and 113 square
inches of individual floor space per white hen.
``(c) Final Conversion Phase.--As of December 31, 2029, all
egg-laying hens confined in caging devices shall be provided
adequate environmental enrichments and a minimum of 144
square inches of individual floor space per brown hen and 124
square inches of individual floor space per white hen.
``(d) Compliance.--
``(1) At the end of six years after the date of enactment
of the Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012, the
Secretary shall determine, after having reviewed and analyzed
the results of an independent, national survey of caging
devices conducted in 2018, whether the requirements of
subsection (a) have been met. If the Secretary finds that the
requirements of subsection (a) have not been met, then
beginning January 1, 2020, the floor space requirements
(irrespective of the date such requirements expire) related
to new caging devices contained in subsection (b)(2)(B) of
section 7A shall apply to existing caging devices placed into
operation prior to January 1, 1995.
``(2) At the end of 12 years after the date of enactment of
the Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012, and again
after December 31, 2029, the Secretary shall submit to the
Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives and
the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the
Senate a report on compliance with subsections (b) and (c).
``(3) Notwithstanding section 12, the remedies provided in
this subsection shall be the exclusive remedies for
violations of this section.''.
(c) Inspections.--Section 5 of the Egg Products Inspection
Act (21 U.S.C. 1034) is amended--
(1) in subsection (d), by inserting ``(other than
requirements with respect to housing, treatment, and house-
related labeling)'' after ``as he deems appropriate to assure
compliance with such requirements''; and
(2) in subsection (e)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and'';
(ii) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C);
(iii) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following new
subparagraph:
``(B) are derived from egg-laying hens housed and treated
in compliance with section 7A; and''; and
(iv) in subparagraph (C), as redesignated by clause (ii),
by inserting ``adequate housing-related labeling and'' after
``contain'';
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``In the case of a shell
egg packer'' and inserting ``In the cases of an egg handler
with a flock of more than 3,000 egg-laying hens and a shell
egg packer'';
(C) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``(other than
requirements with respect to housing, treatment, and housing-
related labeling)'' after ``to ensure compliance with the
requirements of paragraph (1)''; and
(D) in paragraph (4), by striking ``with a flock of not
more than 3,000 layers.'' and inserting ``who buys, sells,
handles, or processes eggs or egg products solely from one
flock of not more than 3,000 egg-laying hens.''.
(d) Labeling.--Section 7 of the Egg Products Inspection Act
of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 1036) is amended in subsection (a) by
inserting ``adequate housing-related labeling,'' after
``plant where the products were processed,''.
(e) Limitation on Exemptions by Secretary.--Section 15 of
the Egg Products Inspection Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 1044) is
amended in subsection (a) by inserting ``, not including
subsection (c) of section 8,'' after ``exempt from specific
provisions''.
(f) Imports.--Section 17 of the Egg Products Inspection Act
of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 1046) is amended in paragraph (2) of
subsection (a) by striking ``subdivision thereof and are
labeled and packaged'' and inserting ``subdivision thereof;
and no eggs or egg products capable of use as human food
shall be imported into the United States unless they are
produced, labeled, and packaged''.
SEC. 3. ENFORCEMENT OF HEN HOUSING AND TREATMENT STANDARDS.
(a) In General.--Section 8 of the Egg Products Inspection
Act (21 U.S.C. 1037) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (c), (d), (e), and (f) as
subsections (d), (e), (f), and (g), respectively;
(2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new
subsection:
``(c)(1) No person shall buy, sell, or transport, or offer
to buy or sell, or offer or receive for transportation, in
any business or commerce any eggs or egg products derived
from egg-laying hens housed or treated in violation of any
provision of section 7A.
``(2) No person shall buy, sell, or transport, or offer to
buy or sell, or offer or receive for transportation, in any
business or commerce any eggs or egg products derived from
egg-laying hens unless the container or package, including
any immediate container, of the eggs or egg products,
beginning one year after the date of enactment of the Egg
Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012, contains adequate
housing-related labeling.
``(3) No person shall buy, sell, or transport, or offer to
buy or sell, or offer or receive for transportation, in any
business or commerce, in California, any eggs or egg products
derived from egg-laying hens unless the egg-laying hens are--
``(A) provided--
``(i) beginning January 1, 2015, and through December 31,
2020, a minimum of 134 square inches of individual floor
space per brown hen and 116 square inches of individual floor
space per white hen; and
``(ii) beginning January 1, 2021, a minimum of 144 square
inches of individual floor space per brown hen and 124 square
inches of individual floor space per white hen; and
``(B) provided, beginning December 31, 2018, adequate
environmental enrichments.''; and
(3) in subsection (e), as redesignated by paragraph (1), by
inserting ``7A,'' after ``section''.
(b) Limitation on Authority of Secretary of Health and
Human Services.--Section 13 of the Egg Products Inspection
Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 1042) is amended by inserting ``(with
respect to violations other than those related to
requirements with respect to housing, treatment, and housing-
related labeling) the'' after ``Before any violation of this
chapter is reported by the Secretary of Agriculture or''.
SEC. 4. STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITY.
Section 23 of the Egg Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C.
1052) is amended--
(a) by redesignating subsections (c) and (d) as
subsections (d) and (e), respectively;
(b) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new
subsection:
[[Page S3636]]
``(c) Prohibition Against Additional or Different
Requirements Than Federal Requirements Related to Minimum
Space Allotments for Housing Egg-Laying Hens in Commercial
Egg Production.--Requirements within the scope of this
chapter with respect to minimum floor space allotments or
enrichments for egg-laying hens housed in commercial egg
production which are in addition to or different than those
made under this chapter may not be imposed by any State or
local jurisdiction. Otherwise the provisions of this chapter
shall not invalidate any law or other provisions of any State
or other jurisdiction in the absence of a conflict with this
chapter.''; and
(c) by inserting after subsection (e), as redesignated by
subsection (a), the following new subsection:
``(f) Role of California Department of Food and
Agriculture.--With respect to eggs produced, shipped,
handled, transported or received in California prior to the
date that is 18 years after the date of enactment of the Egg
Products Inspection Act Amendments of 2012, the Secretary
shall delegate to the California Department of Food and
Agriculture the authority to enforce sections 7A(a)(3),
7A(b)(3), 8(c)(3), and 11.''.
SEC. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Act shall take effect upon enactment.
______
By Mr. LEAHY (for himself and Mr. Grassley):
S. 3245. A bill to permanently reauthorize the EB 5 Regional Center
Program, the E-Verify Program, the Special Immigrant Nonminister
Religious Worker Program, and the Conrad State 30 J 1 Visa Waiver
Program; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today I am pleased to be joined by Senator
Grassley, in introducing legislation that will permanently authorize
four expiring immigration programs. I thank Senator Grassley for
working with me on this needed legislation.
The bill we introduce will permanently authorize the EB 5 Regional
Center Program, the voluntary E-Verify electronic work authorization
program, the State 30 J 1 Visa program that Senator Conrad champions
and the Special Immigrant Nonminister Religious Worker Program that is
so important to Senator Hatch. All of these programs have been in
temporary status for many years, and the time has come for Congress to
make them permanent so that the proponents of these programs can get to
work building upon the benefits these programs bring to communities
across the country. Permanency for these programs will strengthen our
economy, create jobs, and enhance the security of American workers.
Permanency will help medically underserved areas obtain talented
physicians and religious institutions welcome individuals from around
the world to participate in good works. These programs serve diverse
and important interests in America, and should become permanent
fixtures in our immigration law.
I am particularly pleased that the EB 5 Regional Center Program is a
part of this package. With permanency, I believe this program can
become an even greater economic driver than it has been in communities
across the United States. Making the program permanent will also create
a solid foundation for me and others interested in its success to begin
in earnest to make improvements and reforms that will make it more
business friendly, more predictable and stable for investors, and will
provide U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services with the tools it
needs to ensure that the program meets the highest standards of quality
and integrity. There is little reason that this program should not
continue to improve as a deficit-neutral source of capital investment
and job creation across America.
I hope our introduction of this legislation today is the beginning of
a strong bipartisan effort to make these programs permanent. I look
forward to working with Senator Grassley and others to accomplish this
goal.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 3245
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. PERMANENT REAUTHORIZATION OF EB 5 REGIONAL CENTER
PROGRAM.
Section 610 of the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and
State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations
Act, 1993 (8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amended--
(1) by striking ``pilot'' each place such term appears; and
(2) in subsection (b), by striking ``until September 30,
2012''.
SEC. 2. PERMANENT REAUTHORIZATION OF E VERIFY.
(a) In General.--Section 401 of the Illegal Immigration
Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C.
1324a note) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``pilot'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``the pilot programs'' and inserting ``the
programs required under this subtitle''; and
(B) by striking ``Unless the Congress otherwise provides,
the Secretary of Homeland Security shall terminate a pilot
program on September 30, 2012.''; and
(3) in subsection (d)--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (1), (2), (3), (4), (5),
(6), and (7) as paragraphs (4), (1), (5), (2), (3), (7), and
(6), respectively; and
(B) by amending paragraph (4), as redesignated, to read as
follows:
``(4) Program.--The term `program' means any of the 3
programs provided for under this subtitle.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Subtitle A of title IV of
division C of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant
Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1324a note) is amended--
(1) in section 402, by striking ``pilot'' each place such
term appears; and
(2) in section 403(a)(2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by amending clause (i) to read as
follows:
``(i) A document referred to in section 274A(b)(1)(B)(ii)
of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1324a(b)(1)(B)(ii)) shall be designated by the Secretary of
Homeland Security as suitable for the purpose of
identification in a program provided for under this
subtitle.''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``pilot''.
SEC. 3. PERMANENT REAUTHORIZATION OF SPECIAL IMMIGRANT
NONMINISTER RELIGIOUS WORKER PROGRAM.
Section 101(a)(27)(C)(ii) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(27)(C)(ii)) is amended--
(1) in subclause (II), by striking ``before September 30,
2012,''; and
(2) in subclause (III), by striking ``before September 30,
2012,''.
SEC. 4. PERMANENT REAUTHORIZATION OF CONRAD STATE 30 J 1 VISA
WAIVER PROGRAM.
Section 220(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Technical
Corrections Act of 1994 (8 U.S.C. 1182 note) is amended by
striking ``and before September 30, 2012''.
______
By Ms. SNOWE:
S. 3246. A bill to improve the Service Corps of Retired Executives,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship.
Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to
strengthen the resources and support that we provide to entrepreneurs,
and to strengthen oversight of the SCORE program.
In 1964, the Small Business Administration recognized that retired
business executives who volunteered to share their knowledge and
expertise could be invaluable to entrepreneurs. From this, SCORE was
established and has since grown to over 360 chapters across America. As
with any type of growth, there comes an essential need for increased
organization and oversight. This bill seeks to assist the SBA and SCORE
with just that.
The key to getting our nation on the road to economic recovery lies
in the hands of small business, which is why I am always looking for
ways to improve the SBA's entrepreneurial assistance programs. By
creating a SCORE Advisory Board which functions to monitor and develop
initiatives for programs affecting SCORE chapters, we can ensure that
entrepreneurs in all areas of our economy are served by high-quality
mentoring services. Specifically, this board is compromised of six
members coming from the owners and employees of small businesses
themselves, in addition to current members of SCORE chapters.
While some may argue that funding for SCORE should be increased, in
this budget environment, where Federal revenues and spending are
misaligned to the tune of $1.1 trillion this year alone, we must find
ways to be more efficient with existing resources. I am hopeful that
with administrative reforms and increased transparency, we can make the
SCORE program more cost effective, while maintaining its vital
assistance to small businesses.
For example, there is currently no oversight for funding allocations
to individual SCORE chapters. In the past three fiscal years, only $2.5
million of the $7 million appropriated to SCORE has been distributed to
the SCORE districts and chapters. The bulk of their funding, $4.5
million, has been spent on
[[Page S3637]]
staffing, administrative expenses, technology, and overhead. As a non-
profit organization, SCORE seeks to support small businesses across the
country with thousands of volunteers but only very limited resources.
It is imperative that there are transparent and fair practices in place
for allocation of SBA funding to best provide for these small
businesses. Therefore, my bill requires the creation of an Allocation
Committee, comprised of Advisory Board members who will ensure that not
less than 50 percent of SCORE's total allocation goes to the districts
and chapters that directly serve small business clients.
To safeguard funds appropriated to SCORE, my bill also places a limit
on the taxpayer funded salary of SCORE's CEO, which according to the
latest Internal Revenue Service filing, is 43 percent higher than that
of the SBA's Administrator, who oversees the entire agency, including
SCORE. This bill establishes in statute that the SCORE CEO follow the
salary cap of a Senior Executive Service level Federal employee,
ensuring that more money is available for the small businesses driving
our economy. Additionally, this bill proposes to limit the Federal
share of this salary even further when that CEO serves in a leadership
capacity on a foundation affiliated with SCORE.
Through the Advisory Board and its Allocation Committee, we will add
much needed improvements to an already successful program. By enhancing
integration between SCORE chapters and the SBA, small businesses will
have even more support to sustain their contributions to our recovering
economy.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 3246
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``SCORE Program Improvement
Act of 2012''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act--
(1) the terms ``Administration'' and ``Administrator'' mean
the Small Business Administration and the Administrator
thereof, respectively;
(2) the term ``SCORE'' means the Service Corps of Retired
Executives established under section 8(b)(1) of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(b)(1));
(3) the term ``SCORE Advisory Board'' means the SCORE
Advisory Board established under section 101 of this Act;
(4) the term ``SCORE chapter'' means a chapter of the
Service Corps of Retired Executives; and
(5) the term ``small business concern'' has the meaning
given that term under section 3 of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 632).
TITLE I--SCORE ADVISORY BOARD
SEC. 101. ESTABLISHMENT OF ADVISORY BOARD.
(a) Establishment.--There is established the SCORE Advisory
Board.
(b) Membership.--
(1) Composition.--The SCORE Advisory Board shall be
composed of 6 members, who shall be appointed from among
individuals having outstanding qualifications and known to be
familiar with and sympathetic to the needs and problems of
small business concerns.
(2) Limitations.--Of the individuals appointed under
paragraph (1)--
(A) not more than 3 may be members of a SCORE chapter; and
(B) 3 shall be owners or employees of small business
concerns or members of an association that represents small
business concerns.
(3) Prohibition.--The members of the SCORE Advisory Board
may not be employees of the Federal Government.
(4) Date.--The appointments of the members of the SCORE
Advisory Board shall be made not later than 90 days after the
date of enactment of this Act.
(c) Terms.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), a
member of the SCORE Advisory Board shall be appointed for a
term of 3 years.
(2) First members.--Of the members first appointed to the
SCORE Advisory Board--
(A) 2 shall be appointed for a term of 4 years, of whom 1
shall be a member described in subsection (b)(2)(A) and 1
shall be a member described in subsection (b)(2)(B);
(B) 2 shall be appointed for a term of 3 years, of whom 1
shall be a member described in subsection (b)(2)(A) and 1
shall be a member described in subsection (b)(2)(B); and
(C) 2 shall be appointed for a term of 2 years, of whom 1
shall be a member described in subsection (b)(2)(A) and 1
shall be a member described in subsection (b)(2)(B).
(d) Vacancies.--
(1) In general.--A vacancy on the SCORE Advisory Board
shall be filled in the manner in which the original
appointment was made and shall be subject to any conditions
which applied with respect to the original appointment.
(2) Filling unexpired term.--An individual chosen to fill a
vacancy shall be appointed for the unexpired term of the
member replaced.
(e) Initial Meeting.--Not later than 60 days after the date
on which all members of the SCORE Advisory Board have been
appointed, the SCORE Advisory Board shall hold its first
meeting.
(f) Meetings.--The SCORE Advisory Board shall meet--
(1) not less frequently than semiannually; and
(2) at the call of the Chairman.
(g) Quorum.--A majority of the members of the SCORE
Advisory Board shall constitute a quorum, but a lesser number
of members may hold hearings.
(h) Chairman.--The SCORE Advisory Board shall select a
Chairman from among its members.
SEC. 102. DUTIES OF THE SCORE ADVISORY BOARD.
(a) Duties.--The SCORE Advisory Board shall--
(1) review and monitor plans and programs developed in the
public and private sector which affect SCORE chapters;
(2) provide advice on improving coordination between plans
and programs described in paragraph (1);
(3) advise SCORE chapters on the use of Federal funds
allocated to SCORE;
(4) develop and promote initiatives, policies, programs,
and plans designed to assist with the mentoring services
offered by SCORE chapters throughout the United States; and
(5) advise the Administrator on the development and
implementation of an annual comprehensive plan under
subsection (b).
(b) Development of Plan.--The Administrator shall develop
and implement an annual comprehensive plan for joint efforts
by the public and private sectors to facilitate the formation
and development of mentoring by SCORE volunteers.
(c) Annual Report.--Not later than 30 days after the end of
each fiscal year, the SCORE Advisory Board shall submit to
the President, the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship of the Senate, and the Committee on Small
Business of the House of Representatives a report that
contains--
(1) the minutes of each meeting of the SCORE Advisory Board
during the fiscal year to which the report relates;
(2) a detailed description of the activities of the SCORE
Advisory Board during the fiscal year to which the report
relates, including how the SCORE Advisory Board carried out
the duties described in subsection (a);
(3) recommendations for promoting SCORE chapters and
mentoring services; and
(4) any concurring or dissenting views of the
Administrator.
SEC. 103. POWERS OF THE SCORE ADVISORY BOARD.
(a) Hearings.--The SCORE Advisory Board may hold such
hearings, sit and act at such times and places, take such
testimony, and receive such evidence as the SCORE Advisory
Board considers advisable to carry out this Act.
(b) Task Groups.--The SCORE Advisory Board may establish a
temporary task group to carry out any duty of the SCORE
Advisory Board described in section 4.
(c) Information From Federal Agencies.--The SCORE Advisory
Board may secure directly from any Federal department or
agency such information as the SCORE Advisory Board considers
necessary to carry out this Act. Upon request of the Chairman
of the SCORE Advisory Board, the head of such department or
agency shall furnish such information to the SCORE Advisory
Board.
(d) Postal Services.--The SCORE Advisory Board may use the
United States mails in the same manner and under the same
conditions as other departments and agencies of the Federal
Government.
(e) Gifts.--The SCORE Advisory Board may accept, use, and
dispose of gifts or donations of services or property.
SEC. 104. SCORE ADVISORY BOARD PERSONNEL MATTERS.
(a) Compensation.--Members of the SCORE Advisory Board
shall not be compensated for services performed on behalf of
the SCORE Advisory Board.
(b) Travel Expenses.--The members of the SCORE Advisory
Board shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in
lieu of subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of
agencies under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United
States Code, while away from their homes or regular places of
business in the performance of services for the SCORE
Advisory Board.
(c) Detail of Government Employees.--Any Federal Government
employee may be detailed to the SCORE Advisory Board without
reimbursement, and such detail shall be without interruption
or loss of civil service status or privilege.
SEC. 105. INAPPLICABILITY OF THE FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
ACT TO THE SCORE ADVISORY BOARD.
Section 14 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C.
App.) shall not apply with respect to the SCORE Advisory
Board.
SEC. 106. FUNDING.
The expenses of the SCORE Advisory Board, including
expenses relating to personnel, as described in section 104,
shall be paid by SCORE, from amounts made available to SCORE
to carry out section 8(b)(1)(B)
[[Page S3638]]
of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(b)(1)(B)).
TITLE II--FINANCIAL REFORMS
SEC. 201. REAUTHORIZATION.
Section 20 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 note)
is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (j) as subsection (f); and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(g) SCORE Program.--The Administrator may make grants and
enter into cooperative agreements to carry out the SCORE
program authorized by section 8(b)(1) in a total amount that
does not exceed $7,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2013,
2014, and 2015.''.
SEC. 202. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF SCORE.
(a) Limitation on Amount of Salary.--The rate of basic pay
of the chief executive officer of SCORE may not exceed the
maximum rate of basic pay established under section 5382 of
title 5, United States Code, for a position in the Senior
Executive Service.
(b) Federal Share of Salary.--For any year during which the
chief executive officer of SCORE serves in a leadership
capacity on a foundation affiliated with SCORE, the Federal
share of the basic pay of the chief executive officer of
SCORE may not exceed 80 percent.
SEC. 203. ALLOCATION COMMITTEE.
(a) Establishment.--SCORE shall establish a committee to
determine the amount allocated each year to each SCORE
chapter.
(b) Members.--The members of the committee established
under subsection (a) shall include--
(1) 1 member of the staff of SCORE who is not the chief
executive officer of SCORE; and
(2) not fewer than 4 members of the SCORE Advisory Board.
SEC. 204. ALLOCATION OF AMOUNTS.
SCORE shall establish a method for allocating amounts
received by SCORE from the Federal Government, which shall--
(1) ensure that not less than 50 percent of the amounts are
allocated to SCORE chapters; and
(2) be subject to the approval of the Administrator and the
committee established under section 203.
SEC. 205. GAO STUDY AND REPORT.
(a) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States
shall conduct a study of the technology activities of SCORE
that includes an examination of each expenditure by SCORE for
technology activities and the result of each such
expenditure.
(b) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit
to Congress and the Administrator a report that contains--
(1) a detailed description of the amounts SCORE has
expended for technology activities, including how SCORE
expended Federal funds to carry out and sustain technology
initiatives during the 4-year period ending on the date of
enactment of this Act;
(2) a determination of whether SCORE has expended Federal
funds efficiently and effectively to carry out technology
activities;
(3) an evaluation of--
(A) how well SCORE has met objectives relating to
technology spending; and
(B) the policy that resulted in the establishment of
objectives relating to technology spending; and
(4) recommendations for actions by SCORE to achieve
objectives relating to technology spending while safeguarding
Federal funds.
______
By Mr. ENZI (for himself, Mr. Johnson of South Dakota, Mr.
Conrad, Mr. Hoeven, Mr. Thune, Mr. Bennet, Mr. Udall of
Colorado, Mr. Moran, Mr. Udall of New Mexico, Mr. Johanns, and
Mr. Whitehouse):
S. 3248. A bill to designate the North American bison as the national
mammal of the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I wish to provide a few comments regarding
the introduction of the Bison Legacy Act. Senator Tim Johnson of South
Dakota and I are introducing this legislation today because of the
significant role the North American Bison has played in the history of
our Nation. This bill honors that legacy by designating the bison as
the national mammal of the United States.
The bison has been integrally linked to the economic and spiritual
lives of many Native American tribes over the centuries. Since our
frontier days, the bison has become a symbol of American strength and
determination. The Department of Interior has depicted the bison on its
official seal for 94 years and the buffalo nickel played an important
role in modernizing our currency in the early 20th century. At one
point in American history, bison were brought in to graze outside the
original Smithsonian building here in Washington, DC.
I must also add that my home State of Wyoming is one of three states
that recognize the bison as its official state mammal and has honored
an image of a bison on the Wyoming state flag since it was first
adopted in 1917. Today, thousands of American bison freely roam
Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Park in Wyoming. The bison is also
important to our state's economic well-being with a growing number of
ranchers raising bison for consumers all over the world.
This bill is supported by a wide variety of stakeholders. I want to
recognize the National Bison Association who represents the interests
of the bison ranchers in nearly every single State. Also behind this
bill is the Intertribal Bison Council supporting the cultural role the
bison has played in Native American history. Finally, there is the
Wildlife Conservation Society who wishes to honor the restoration of
bison in North America since the 19th century.
I ask my colleagues to help me support and pass this legislation
honoring the bison and designating it as our national mammal. The bison
has and will continue to be a symbol of America, its people and a way
of life.
______
By Ms. LANDRIEU (for herself and Ms. Snowe):
S. 3253. A bill to amend the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 to
enhance the Small Business Investment Company Program, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, as National Small Business Week is
coming to a close, I come to the floor today to make a strong
commitment that the Senate Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship will not lose momentum on our relentless push to help
America's small businesses grow, thrive, and excel. So today, along
with the senior senator from Maine, I am introducing the Expanding
Access to Capital for Entrepreneurial Leaders Act, or the EXCEL Act.
This legislation will enhance the already successful Small Business
Investment Company, SBIC, program at the Small Business Administration,
SBA, that has helped over 100,000 small businesses. The best part of
our bill is that the EXCEL Act should not cost the taxpayer anything.
The SBA runs a venture capital program by guaranteeing money borrowed
by qualified investment funds who invest in small businesses. The
qualified funds, or Small Business Investment Companies, SBICs, are
privately owned and operated, but licensed and regulated by the SBA.
Using a combination of private investments and the loans guaranteed by
the SBA, typically at a ratio of $2 in guaranteed funds for every $1 of
private capital, SBICs make long-term investments in American small
businesses. In order to participate in the program, funds pay licensing
fees which serve to cover all SBIC program costs. As a result, the core
SBIC program, Debenture SBICs, not only boasts a strong success rate,
but also incurs no cost to the U.S. government. Since the program's
inception, over $50 billion has been invested in over 100,000 small
businesses.
The Ranking Member of the Small Business Committee and I conducted a
roundtable with 14 participants from the SBA, SBICs, investors in
SBICs, and small businesses to elicit suggestions on enhancing the
program. Out of that was born the EXCEL Act.
The EXCEL Act is a bipartisan effort encompassing much-needed changes
that will allow the SBIC program to meet growing demand and will make
improvements so that more small businesses can access capital.
The first thing the EXCEL Act does is raises the SBIC program
authorization level from $3 billion to $4 billion and pegs it to
inflation. This change is long overdue--the ceiling has been at $3 for
some time, despite inflation and the impressive growth in the SBIC
program. To illustrate: the program grew 50 percent in FY2011 alone. In
order to meet demand, we need to give the program room to grow.
Secondly, the EXCEL Act will encourage successful investors by
raising the limit on ``families of funds.'' Family of funds refers to a
team of SBIC fund managers who operate several funds. These are
currently limited to $225 million of SBA-guaranteed debt. However, SBIC
fund managers who manage more than one fund generally see better
investment results. The EXCEL Act will encourage that kind of success
by giving families of funds a higher limit of $350 million, which will
be indexed to inflation.
Next, the EXCEL Act improves transparency and accountability in the
program. The legislation requires that
[[Page S3639]]
the SBA make public how effective individual SBICs are in their small
business investments, guaranteeing that SBA-backed money is being used
responsibly.
Finally, the EXCEL Act promotes outreach, thereby ensuring that the
maximum possible number of small businesses can benefit from the SBIC
program. The legislation encourages outreach to community banks and
other lenders, states and municipalities, and asks the SBA to make
their SBIC website more user-friendly.
The EXCEL Act contains a number of common sense provisions supported
across the aisle, and is sponsored by the Chair and Ranking Member of
the Small Business Committee. It enhances a program with proven success
in providing capital to small businesses, and does so with the
expectation that it will not add a dime to the deficit. Let us get this
bill passed. Let us help small businesses excel.
____________________